Social Democracy tell you to think that because Hitler voted in democratically he is good personality!!

Is a lie! He toast Jews like they pita bread and try to take over world like Genghis Khan on acid!

Social Democracy tell you to think that always majority being happy is good thing but sometimes making majority suffer is good thing because in words of great Rihanna (look at song for evidence that the speak this words) CHAIN AND WHIP EXCITE ME!

There is two types of Social Democratic personality! The one who count the ballot with honesty because they won the vote or the one who fake winning the vote anyway! This the way Social Democracy train you to be, Stalin do it, Hitler do it and all other pinnacle of democracy do it throughout historically! Think that 'we vote and give majority what they want and good will happen' is like to think that 'give three men a boner better than just my husband' oh no you get divorce because of this!

I'm really confused what your argument is are your trying to say that every democratic country is corrupt to the point where every election is rigged ? Social democracy Personality? Please make sure your grammar is at least acceptable. And as a correction Stalin was the leader of the single party Marxist state which is completely different. I'm not sure if you truly understand social democracy. Most forms of social democracy are in multiple political parties in shared power among other parties. They are not dictatorships like you think. Canada, Sweden, Norway, France has social democratic parties in power and yet they are not dictatorships. Also please when you write up your argument actually make it readable and coherent.

They only thing they mention is that certain European nations are democratic but not dictatorships. Dictatorships are not democracies in the first place. Aside from this, a major flaw of European nation is that they are far too nice to nasty people. When France outlawed hijab its own people began rioting and screaming in outrage, but when Saudi Arabia outlawed western clothing and lack of Hijab, no one batted an eyelid. Europe is often condemned by the less democratic Muslims for being rude to Muslims but they are actually so ridiculously overly polite and scared of engaging in full blow nuking on these Jihadis that they, as a whole, as considered the cowards of this world.

Again i don't know what your point is. are you trying to say that social democratic countries are to peaceful? and mentioning the outlaw of the h jab in France, although I'm not in favor of this. the reason why this created such a controversy is because of France's Muslim population and that France is known to be a full complete democracy, Saudi Arabia on the other hand is a dictatorship ruled by a monarch; the freedom index shows that it is an authoritarian state where religion is instituted within its own government. i don't agree with both countries decisions since progress will only happen when the state leaves alone religion and doesn't have any ties to religion.

Again before you applied that Hitler and Stalin were social democrats or it would seem, which they weren't.

Another thing is is that im not sure what your point is about taking military action in the middle east. if in case your saying that you want to engage in a complete nuclear strike on the middle east then i think you really don't understand what would happen. All conservatives and libertarians alike don't want to go to war never mind nuclear war.

If you really think that detonating nuclear weapons over the middle east is a good idea, then you really don't know enough of whats going to understand this debate

So far we shifted from me trying to redefine what a dictatorship is to trying and trying to explain why its not a good idea to start a nuclear holocaust on the Muslim population.

And let me remind you of who else has nuclear weapons. Russia and China both of which have ICBM's and thermonuclear weapons and will not stand for a nuclear genocide on the Muslims.